Advertisement

Towards Conceptualizing Quality-Related Stakeholder Interactions in Software Development

  • Vladimir A. Shekhovtsov
  • Heinrich C. Mayr
  • Christian Kop
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 137)

Abstract

The paper addresses the issue of organizing quality-related interaction between business stakeholders and software developers relying on established common vocabulary. It establishes a conceptual representation for the process of such interaction. This conceptualization is based on a set of notions representing software quality and its particular incarnations; they are used to define the activities of the interaction process. The process is conceptualized on two levels: a coarse-grained level defining the set of generic activities and the conditions of launching these activities and a fine-grained level describing particular interaction steps in detail. The conceptualization is expected to be shared as a part of upcoming ontology of stakeholder quality perception and assessment.

Keywords

Software Process Software Quality Negotiation Activity Quality Space Business Actor 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Acuna, S.T., Juristo, N. (eds.): Software Process Modeling. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Acuna, S.T., Sanchez-Segura, M.I. (eds.): New Trends in Software Process Modeling. World Scientific, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Adolph, S., Hall, W., Kruchten, P.: Using grounded theory to study the experience of software development. Empirical Software Engineering 16, 487–513 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Adolph, S., Kruchten, P.: Reconciling Perspectives: How People Manage the Process of Software Development. In: AGILE 2011, pp. 48–56. IEEE, New York (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bachmann, A., Hesse, W., Ru, A., Kop, C., Mayr, H.C., Vohringer, J.: A Practical Approach to Ontology-based Software Engineering. In: EMISA 2007. LNI, vol. P-119, pp. 129–142. GI, Bonn (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carvallo, J.P.: Systematic Construction of Quality Models for COTS-Based Systems. PhD Thesis. Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Barcelona (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chung, L., Nixon, B.A., Yu, E., Mylopoulos, J.: Non-Functional Requirements in Software Engineering. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston (1999)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Coleman, G., O’Connor, R.: Investigating software process in practice: A grounded theory perspective. The Journal of Systems and Software 81, 772–784 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cote, M., Suryn, W., Georgiadou, E.: Software Quality Model Requirements for Software Quality Engineering. In: 14th International Conference on Software Quality Management, Quebec, pp. 31–50 (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Deissenboeck, F., Juergens, E., Lochmann, K., Wagner, S.: Software quality models: Purposes, usage scenarios and requirements. In: WoSQ 2009, pp. 9–14. IEEE, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gärdenfors, P.: Conceptual Spaces: A Geometry of Thought. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hesse, W.: Ontologies in the Software Engineering process. In: Proc. EAI 2005. Ceur-WS.org, vol. 141, pp. 3–16 (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    ISO/IEC 9126-2:2003: Software Engineering – Product Quality – Part 2: External Metrics. ISO (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    ISO/IEC 9126-4:2004: Software Engineering – Product Quality – Part 4: Quality-in-Use Metrics. ISO (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    ISO/IEC 25010:2011: Systems and software engineering – Systems and software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) – System and software quality models. ISO (2011)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jureta, I.: Essays in Information Management: Contributions to the Modeling and Analysis of Quality in Information Systems Engineering, PhD Thesis. Department of Business Administration. University of Namur (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jureta, I., Mylopoulos, J., Faulkner, S.: A core ontology for requirements. Applied Ontology 4, 169–244 (2009)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kabilan, V., Johannesson, P., Ruohomaa, S., Moen, P., Herrmann, A., Ehlfeldt, R.M., Weigand, H.: Introducing the Common Non-Functional Ontology. In: Gonçalves, R.J., Müller, J.P. (eds.) Enterprise Interoperability II, pp. 633–645. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kaschek, R., Kop, C., Shekhovtsov, V.A., Mayr, H.C.: Towards Simulation-Based Quality Requirements Elicitation: A Position Paper. In: Rolland, C. (ed.) REFSQ 2008. LNCS, vol. 5025, pp. 135–140. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Masolo, C., Borgo, S.: Qualities in formal ontology. In: Foundational Aspects of Ontologies Workshop at KI 2005, Koblenz, pp. 2–16 (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Masolo, C., Borgo, S., Gangemi, A., Guarino, N., Oltramari, A.: The WonderWeb Library of Foundational Ontologies. WonderWeb Deliverable D18. Ontology Library (final). . ISTC-CNR, Trento (2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Raubal, M.: Formalizing Conceptual Spaces. In: Proceedings of Formal Ontology in Information Systems, FOIS 2004, pp. 153–164. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sharmaz, K.: Constructing Grounded Theory. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2006)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shekhovtsov, V.A.: On the evolution of quality conceptualization techniques. In: Kaschek, R., Delcambre, L. (eds.) The Evolution of Conceptual Modeling. LNCS, vol. 6520, pp. 117–136. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shekhovtsov, V.A., Mayr, H.C., Kop, C.: Stakeholder Involvement into Quality Definition and Evaluation for Service-Oriented Systems. Accepted for Publication in Proc. ICSE 2012 Workshops. IEEE, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Software Process Engineering Metamodel (SPEM) 2.0. OMG (2008)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tian, J.: Quality-Evaluation Models and Measurements. IEEE Software 21, 84–91 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wagner, S., Lochmann, K., Winter, S., Goeb, A., Klaes, M.: Quality models in practice: A preliminary analysis. In: ESEM 2009, pp. 464–467. IEEE, New York (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vladimir A. Shekhovtsov
    • 1
  • Heinrich C. Mayr
    • 1
  • Christian Kop
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Applied InformaticsAlpen-Adria-Universität KlagenfurtAustria

Personalised recommendations